Wednesday, May 10, 2006
The Cost Of Informing Our Poltics With Our Faith
When religious faith goes public, it better be pretty good religious faith because you can bet someone is going to challenge it. If a person of faith in public life fails to meet the standards that faith sets for them, both the public good that person may have accomplished and the veracity of the faith are called into question. This questioning reflects not just of the individual, but on the public affiliations and religious organizations that the individual is associatesd with. A public person of faith must hold themselve to a much higher standard than a non-public person because so much is at risk. Whether pastor of politician what they do reflects not just on them, but on all who wear the same labels they do.
Those were the thoughts that passed through my mind as I read this article from Newsbusters. The article desires to bust Katie Couric's chops for daring to question Joel Osteen on matters of faith, in this case his enormous wealth accumulation. In this case; however, I have to side with Couric - Osteen is not a great representative of evangelical Christianity, and while Couric's handling of scripture was a bit hamfisted, her basic line of questioning is probably right where I'd go with Osteen if I had the chance.
This episode makes two really important points. The first is that if a person is very public about their faith, they can rely on the public holding them to account on their faith. From pedophile priests to Osteen's millions, the public is going to be watching very hard. Everybody loves a game of "gotcha" and in a world of saved sinners, gotcha is an easy game to play. This says to me there is no room for the lukewarm believer in public life.
The other point here is that the community of faith must hold those within, and especially those in public life, to account. Osteen's prosperity gospel is just wrong, and the rest of Christianity ought to be declaring it loudly and longly. You see, the real problem with Couric's interview is not that she nails Osteen, but that she clumps him with the rest of us.
In the blogosphere, iMonk and his buddies at the BHT have been very good about pasting Osteen to the wall and making sure anyone who reads them knows he is way out of the ballpark. But unfortunately, their megaphone is just not as big as Osteen's or Couric's.
What we need to learn how to do, I think, is to "speak the truth in love", but do so loudly. So often, loud equates to ugly, or unloving, but I am not convinced it has to. We can ill-afford to have Couric confuse Osteen with mainstream Christianity, but we are not true to our faith unless we find a way to denouce him with grace.
When we go public with our faith, and especially in politics, it puts an excessive burden on us to be true to our faith. If done right it will sharpen and deepen our faith and both the faith and the nation will be better for the exchange. Here's hoping both are up to the task.
Related Tags: faith, politics, Christianity, Joel Osteen, Katie Couric
Those were the thoughts that passed through my mind as I read this article from Newsbusters. The article desires to bust Katie Couric's chops for daring to question Joel Osteen on matters of faith, in this case his enormous wealth accumulation. In this case; however, I have to side with Couric - Osteen is not a great representative of evangelical Christianity, and while Couric's handling of scripture was a bit hamfisted, her basic line of questioning is probably right where I'd go with Osteen if I had the chance.
This episode makes two really important points. The first is that if a person is very public about their faith, they can rely on the public holding them to account on their faith. From pedophile priests to Osteen's millions, the public is going to be watching very hard. Everybody loves a game of "gotcha" and in a world of saved sinners, gotcha is an easy game to play. This says to me there is no room for the lukewarm believer in public life.
The other point here is that the community of faith must hold those within, and especially those in public life, to account. Osteen's prosperity gospel is just wrong, and the rest of Christianity ought to be declaring it loudly and longly. You see, the real problem with Couric's interview is not that she nails Osteen, but that she clumps him with the rest of us.
In the blogosphere, iMonk and his buddies at the BHT have been very good about pasting Osteen to the wall and making sure anyone who reads them knows he is way out of the ballpark. But unfortunately, their megaphone is just not as big as Osteen's or Couric's.
What we need to learn how to do, I think, is to "speak the truth in love", but do so loudly. So often, loud equates to ugly, or unloving, but I am not convinced it has to. We can ill-afford to have Couric confuse Osteen with mainstream Christianity, but we are not true to our faith unless we find a way to denouce him with grace.
When we go public with our faith, and especially in politics, it puts an excessive burden on us to be true to our faith. If done right it will sharpen and deepen our faith and both the faith and the nation will be better for the exchange. Here's hoping both are up to the task.
Related Tags: faith, politics, Christianity, Joel Osteen, Katie Couric
